Announcement

Collapse

The Rules of Pacers Digest

Hello everyone,

Whether your are a long standing forum member or whether you have just registered today, it's a good idea to read and review the rules below so that you have a very good idea of what to expect when you come to Pacers Digest.

A quick note to new members: Your posts will not immediately show up when you make them. An administrator has to approve at least your first post before the forum software will later upgrade your account to the status of a fully-registered member. This usually happens within a couple of hours or so after your post(s) is/are approved, so you may need to be a little patient at first.

Why do we do this? So that it's more difficult for spammers (be they human or robot) to post, and so users who are banned cannot immediately re-register and start dousing people with verbal flames.

Below are the rules of Pacers Digest. After you have read them, you will have a very good sense of where we are coming from, what we expect, what we don't want to see, and how we react to things.

Rule #1

Pacers Digest is intended to be a place to discuss basketball without having to deal with the kinds of behaviors or attitudes that distract people from sticking with the discussion of the topics at hand. These unwanted distractions can come in many forms, and admittedly it can sometimes be tricky to pin down each and every kind that can rear its ugly head, but we feel that the following examples and explanations cover at least a good portion of that ground and should at least give people a pretty good idea of the kinds of things we actively discourage:

"Anyone who __________ is a liar / a fool / an idiot / a blind homer / has their head buried in the sand / a blind hater / doesn't know basketball / doesn't watch the games"

"People with intelligence will agree with me when I say that __________"

"Only stupid people think / believe / do ___________"

"I can't wait to hear something from PosterX when he/she sees that **insert a given incident or current event that will have probably upset or disappointed PosterX here**"

"He/she is just delusional"

"This thread is stupid / worthless / embarrassing"

"I'm going to take a moment to point and / laugh at PosterX / GroupOfPeopleY who thought / believed *insert though/belief here*"

"Remember when PosterX said OldCommentY that no longer looks good? "

In general, if a comment goes from purely on topic to something 'ad hominem' (personal jabs, personal shots, attacks, flames, however you want to call it, towards a person, or a group of people, or a given city/state/country of people), those are most likely going to be found intolerable.

We also dissuade passive aggressive behavior. This can be various things, but common examples include statements that are basically meant to imply someone is either stupid or otherwise incapable of holding a rational conversation. This can include (but is not limited to) laughing at someone's conclusions rather than offering an honest rebuttal, asking people what game they were watching, or another common problem is Poster X will say "that player isn't that bad" and then Poster Y will say something akin to "LOL you think that player is good". We're not going to tolerate those kinds of comments out of respect for the community at large and for the sake of trying to just have an honest conversation.

Now, does the above cover absolutely every single kind of distraction that is unwanted? Probably not, but you should by now have a good idea of the general types of things we will be discouraging. The above examples are meant to give you a good feel for / idea of what we're looking for. If something new or different than the above happens to come along and results in the same problem (that being, any other attitude or behavior that ultimately distracts from actually just discussing the topic at hand, or that is otherwise disrespectful to other posters), we can and we will take action to curb this as well, so please don't take this to mean that if you managed to technically avoid saying something exactly like one of the above examples that you are then somehow off the hook.

That all having been said, our goal is to do so in a generally kind and respectful way, and that doesn't mean the moment we see something we don't like that somebody is going to be suspended or banned, either. It just means that at the very least we will probably say something about it, quite possibly snipping out the distracting parts of the post in question while leaving alone the parts that are actually just discussing the topics, and in the event of a repeating or excessive problem, then we will start issuing infractions to try to further discourage further repeat problems, and if it just never seems to improve, then finally suspensions or bans will come into play. We would prefer it never went that far, and most of the time for most of our posters, it won't ever have to.

A slip up every once and a while is pretty normal, but, again, when it becomes repetitive or excessive, something will be done. Something occasional is probably going to be let go (within reason), but when it starts to become habitual or otherwise a pattern, odds are very good that we will step in.

There's always a small minority that like to push people's buttons and/or test their own boundaries with regards to the administrators, and in the case of someone acting like that, please be aware that this is not a court of law, but a private website run by people who are simply trying to do the right thing as they see it. If we feel that you are a special case that needs to be dealt with in an exceptional way because your behavior isn't explicitly mirroring one of our above examples of what we generally discourage, we can and we will take atypical action to prevent this from continuing if you are not cooperative with us.

Also please be aware that you will not be given a pass simply by claiming that you were 'only joking,' because quite honestly, when someone really is just joking, for one thing most people tend to pick up on the joke, including the person or group that is the target of the joke, and for another thing, in the event where an honest joke gets taken seriously and it upsets or angers someone, the person who is truly 'only joking' will quite commonly go out of his / her way to apologize and will try to mend fences. People who are dishonest about their statements being 'jokes' do not do so, and in turn that becomes a clear sign of what is really going on. It's nothing new.

In any case, quite frankly, the overall quality and health of the entire forum's community is more important than any one troublesome user will ever be, regardless of exactly how a problem is exhibiting itself, and if it comes down to us having to make a choice between you versus the greater health and happiness of the entire community, the community of this forum will win every time.

Lastly, there are also some posters, who are generally great contributors and do not otherwise cause any problems, who sometimes feel it's their place to provoke or to otherwise 'mess with' that small minority of people described in the last paragraph, and while we possibly might understand why you might feel you WANT to do something like that, the truth is we can't actually tolerate that kind of behavior from you any more than we can tolerate the behavior from them. So if we feel that you are trying to provoke those other posters into doing or saying something that will get themselves into trouble, then we will start to view you as a problem as well, because of the same reason as before: The overall health of the forum comes first, and trying to stir the pot with someone like that doesn't help, it just makes it worse. Some will simply disagree with this philosophy, but if so, then so be it because ultimately we have to do what we think is best so long as it's up to us.

If you see a problem that we haven't addressed, the best and most appropriate course for a forum member to take here is to look over to the left of the post in question. See underneath that poster's name, avatar, and other info, down where there's a little triangle with an exclamation point (!) in it? Click that. That allows you to report the post to the admins so we can definitely notice it and give it a look to see what we feel we should do about it. Beyond that, obviously it's human nature sometimes to want to speak up to the poster in question who has bothered you, but we would ask that you try to refrain from doing so because quite often what happens is two or more posters all start going back and forth about the original offending post, and suddenly the entire thread is off topic or otherwise derailed. So while the urge to police it yourself is understandable, it's best to just report it to us and let us handle it. Thank you!

All of the above is going to be subject to a case by case basis, but generally and broadly speaking, this should give everyone a pretty good idea of how things will typically / most often be handled.

Rule #2

If the actions of an administrator inspire you to make a comment, criticism, or express a concern about it, there is a wrong place and a couple of right places to do so.

The wrong place is to do so in the original thread in which the administrator took action. For example, if a post gets an infraction, or a post gets deleted, or a comment within a larger post gets clipped out, in a thread discussing Paul George, the wrong thing to do is to distract from the discussion of Paul George by adding your off topic thoughts on what the administrator did.

The right places to do so are:

A) Start a thread about the specific incident you want to talk about on the Feedback board. This way you are able to express yourself in an area that doesn't throw another thread off topic, and this way others can add their two cents as well if they wish, and additionally if there's something that needs to be said by the administrators, that is where they will respond to it.

B) Send a private message to the administrators, and they can respond to you that way.

If this is done the wrong way, those comments will be deleted, and if it's a repeating problem then it may also receive an infraction as well.

Rule #3

If a poster is bothering you, and an administrator has not or will not deal with that poster to the extent that you would prefer, you have a powerful tool at your disposal, one that has recently been upgraded and is now better than ever: The ability to ignore a user.

When you ignore a user, you will unfortunately still see some hints of their existence (nothing we can do about that), however, it does the following key things:

A) Any post they make will be completely invisible as you scroll through a thread.

B) The new addition to this feature: If someone QUOTES a user you are ignoring, you do not have to read who it was, or what that poster said, unless you go out of your way to click on a link to find out who it is and what they said.

To utilize this feature, from any page on Pacers Digest, scroll to the top of the page, look to the top right where it says 'Settings' and click that. From the settings page, look to the left side of the page where it says 'My Settings', and look down from there until you see 'Edit Ignore List' and click that. From here, it will say 'Add a Member to Your List...' Beneath that, click in the text box to the right of 'User Name', type in or copy & paste the username of the poster you are ignoring, and once their name is in the box, look over to the far right and click the 'Okay' button. All done!

Rule #4

Regarding infractions, currently they carry a value of one point each, and that point will expire in 31 days. If at any point a poster is carrying three points at the same time, that poster will be suspended until the oldest of the three points expires.

Rule #5

When you share or paste content or articles from another website, you must include the URL/link back to where you found it, who wrote it, and what website it's from. Said content will be removed if this doesn't happen.

An example:

If I copy and paste an article from the Indianapolis Star website, I would post something like this:

http://www.linktothearticlegoeshere.com/article
Title of the Article
Author's Name
Indianapolis Star

Rule #6

We cannot tolerate illegal videos on Pacers Digest. This means do not share any links to them, do not mention any websites that host them or link to them, do not describe how to find them in any way, and do not ask about them. Posts doing anything of the sort will be removed, the offenders will be contacted privately, and if the problem becomes habitual, you will be suspended, and if it still persists, you will probably be banned.

The legal means of watching or listening to NBA games are NBA League Pass Broadband (for US, or for International; both cost money) and NBA Audio League Pass (which is free). Look for them on NBA.com.

Rule #7

Provocative statements in a signature, or as an avatar, or as the 'tagline' beneath a poster's username (where it says 'Member' or 'Administrator' by default, if it is not altered) are an unwanted distraction that will more than likely be removed on sight. There can be shades of gray to this, but in general this could be something political or religious that is likely going to provoke or upset people, or otherwise something that is mean-spirited at the expense of a poster, a group of people, or a population.

It may or may not go without saying, but this goes for threads and posts as well, particularly when it's not made on the off-topic board (Market Square).

We do make exceptions if we feel the content is both innocuous and unlikely to cause social problems on the forum (such as wishing someone a Merry Christmas or a Happy Easter), and we also also make exceptions if such topics come up with regards to a sports figure (such as the Lance Stephenson situation bringing up discussions of domestic abuse and the law, or when Jason Collins came out as gay and how that lead to some discussion about gay rights).

However, once the discussion seems to be more/mostly about the political issues instead of the sports figure or his specific situation, the thread is usually closed.

Rule #8

We prefer self-restraint and/or modesty when making jokes or off topic comments in a sports discussion thread. They can be fun, but sometimes they derail or distract from a topic, and we don't want to see that happen. If we feel it is a problem, we will either delete or move those posts from the thread.

Rule #9

Generally speaking, we try to be a "PG-13" rated board, and we don't want to see sexual content or similarly suggestive content. Vulgarity is a more muddled issue, though again we prefer things to lean more towards "PG-13" than "R". If we feel things have gone too far, we will step in.

Rule #10

We like small signatures, not big signatures. The bigger the signature, the more likely it is an annoying or distracting signature.

Rule #11

Do not advertise anything without talking about it with the administrators first. This includes advertising with your signature, with your avatar, through private messaging, and/or by making a thread or post.
See more
See less

George Hill's Role

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • George Hill's Role

    George Hill has been one of our brightest spots this year. Not only is he playing one of his lowest per-game minutes totals, but he has a career high usage rate while maintaining a very efficient shooting game. He has been a stellar defender since he has got his legs under him, and he has become a go-to player.

    A lot of George's success has been attributed to Vogel (having no option but to) give the keys of the offense back to George. There is some truth to this I think. However, I don't think George receives as much blame for last season or as much credit for this season as he actually deserves. Hill freely gives up the ball; he's done so since he arrived here. He's a true team player. Where this hurt is is that Hill is probably our most efficient offensive player. He assists at the highest rate on our team, rarely turns it over, and shoots over 45% on a regular basis despite shooting a decent volume of three pointers. Where this season he demands that his mismatch be looked at, last season he was content to let the other wings get theirs. With no PG and no Lance this season, he demands the ball back when we need to make a play.

    The "Stand in the Corner" myth????
    I have been all on the "Vogel shouldn't have made Hill stand in the corner" bandwagon. But I've been paying attention to how George has scored this season. Hill is STILL regularly passing off to Solo, Watson, or Stuckey to initiate the offense. I don't think standing in the corner was really his problem. I think last season Hill wouldn't get the ball back by design--but he also didn't demand the ball back--when Lance or George would be running the play or calling their own number and get stopped. I think also that Hill has been given a few more plays to catch the ball on the move instead of being used to space the court and that's really helped. So credit to both Hill and Vogel this season.

    But watch what happens this season when George REALLY gets it going. At that point, the opposing team often switches a bigger defender on to Hill. When that happens, Hill essentially starts playing as the de facto shooting guard because the wing can't keep up with George off the ball. He is still running the offense and dictating where the ball goes off the ball though, which is important.

    So what are your thoughts? I think we've had enough talk about our negatives this year and I want to know why everybody thinks George has been so good this year.
    Time for a new sig.

  • #2
    Re: George Hill's Role

    When you look at a good player on a bad team, that player will look great. Recall Troy Murphy racking up double doubles and averaging in the teens...hitting over 40% from three. Dunleavy looking like an all-star. George Hill looks great no doubt. George is better than Troy. But we already know how good George is. He is a finished product and a good starting PG. Let's not start comparing him again to Jeff Teague.

    Comment


    • #3
      Re: George Hill's Role

      Originally posted by BlueNGold View Post
      When you look at a good player on a bad team, that player will look great. Recall Troy Murphy racking up double doubles and averaging in the teens...hitting over 40% from three. Dunleavy looking like an all-star. George Hill looks great no doubt. George is better than Troy. But we already know how good George is. He is a finished product and a good starting PG. Let's not start comparing him again to Jeff Teague.
      Why? Is Jeff Teague demonstrably better than George Hill? I would be totally fine with that statement if you said someone like Westbrook, CP3, Curry, etc. But George Hill can play on Teague's level. I don't think he is quite as good as Teague, but I also don't think the comparison is that far off base.

      Comment


      • #4
        Re: George Hill's Role

        I think the biggest difference with Hill this year is the fact that he looks a lot like the guy that was in SA.

        In SA, whether he played PG or SG, he was in constant movement (ala Tony Parker). This season whether Hill has the ball or not, he seems to be in constant motion, and motion with a purpose.

        Also, I think Hill has made a concerted effort to shoot wherether he's wide open or not. He seems to have figured out that a mediocre shot from him is sometimes better than an open shot from certain teammates.

        His hard work is paying off

        Comment


        • #5
          Re: George Hill's Role

          Hill's last 9 games, they showed it during this Nets game

          21ppg, 5apg, 56%

          PG's he's faced during that stretch

          Avery Bradley and Marcus Smart
          Kyle Lowry
          Kyrie Irving
          Deron Williams
          Patrick Beverly
          John Wall
          MCW
          Rondo

          Comment


          • #6
            Re: George Hill's Role

            Originally posted by BlueNGold View Post
            When you look at a good player on a bad team, that player will look great. Recall Troy Murphy racking up double doubles and averaging in the teens...hitting over 40% from three. Dunleavy looking like an all-star. George Hill looks great no doubt. George is better than Troy. But we already know how good George is. He is a finished product and a good starting PG. Let's not start comparing him again to Jeff Teague.
            G.hill has produced at near the same level for an ECF, as well as for a few SA teams. He's just making the most of his increased opportunities.

            Comment


            • #7
              Re: George Hill's Role

              Originally posted by cdash View Post
              Why? Is Jeff Teague demonstrably better than George Hill? I would be totally fine with that statement if you said someone like Westbrook, CP3, Curry, etc. But George Hill can play on Teague's level. I don't think he is quite as good as Teague, but I also don't think the comparison is that far off base.
              You might want to be careful. We may be facing the Hawks if we could just get by the Nets. I would absolutely love to see him try to defend Teague. Teague could only be stopped by Paul last time. It was a mismatch otherwise. If you recall...

              Comment


              • #8
                Re: George Hill's Role

                Originally posted by BlueNGold View Post
                When you look at a good player on a bad team, that player will look great. Recall Troy Murphy racking up double doubles and averaging in the teens...hitting over 40% from three. Dunleavy looking like an all-star. George Hill looks great no doubt. George is better than Troy. But we already know how good George is. He is a finished product and a good starting PG. Let's not start comparing him again to Jeff Teague.
                I compared George Hill to George Hill, and you told me to stop comparing him to Jeff Teague.
                Time for a new sig.

                Comment


                • #9
                  Re: George Hill's Role

                  Originally posted by Ace E.Anderson View Post
                  G.hill has produced at near the same level for an ECF, as well as for a few SA teams. He's just making the most of his increased opportunities.
                  Not only that, but he's doing it with stellar efficiency. He's shooting more, but he's actually getting better looks while Paul George is sitting out and David West is getting older. And he's doing it while playing both on and off the ball.
                  Time for a new sig.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Re: George Hill's Role

                    Originally posted by aamcguy View Post
                    I compared George Hill to George Hill, and you told me to stop comparing him to Jeff Teague.
                    Sorry. I just didn't want to see that get started again. George is a good solid player and I'm glad he's on the Pacers. He can score and defend. There is not a thing wrong with him being the PG on a title contender. But let's not overrate him. He's a good #4 guy on a title winner. If you have two PG level talents on a team, Hill could be that #3 guy. IMO, that's giving high praise.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Re: George Hill's Role

                      Originally posted by BlueNGold View Post
                      Sorry. I just didn't want to see that get started again. George is a good solid player and I'm glad he's on the Pacers. He can score and defend. There is not a thing wrong with him being the PG on a title contender. But let's not overrate him. He's a good #4 guy on a title winner. If you have two PG level talents on a team, Hill could be that #3 guy. IMO, that's giving high praise.
                      I didn't start this thread to talk about Hill's ranking in the league. I suggest you read my original post, or at least the thread title again. Because I want to talk about how George Hill is having the best season of his career despite facing the most defensive pressure he's ever been up against on a nightly basis.
                      Last edited by aamcguy; 03-31-2015, 11:11 PM.
                      Time for a new sig.

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Re: George Hill's Role

                        Originally posted by BlueNGold View Post
                        You might want to be careful. We may be facing the Hawks if we could just get by the Nets. I would absolutely love to see him try to defend Teague. Teague could only be stopped by Paul last time. It was a mismatch otherwise. If you recall...
                        I recall. Hill couldn't stay in front of Teague; few guys can. Plus our defensive scheme generally encourages Hill to let jitterbug point guards right by him so they can meet Hibbert at the rim. Obviously that was a problem against Atlanta because they pulled Roy away from the basket. Paul George stopped Teague because a) he's a tremendous defender b) his length disrupted Teague's passing lanes and c) his length allowed him to sag off Teague a little more and still challenge his jumpers. So basically, context matters. Clearly you must agree with that, since it's how you have been defending Lance's miserable season.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Re: George Hill's Role

                          Originally posted by aamcguy View Post
                          I compared George Hill to George Hill, and you told me to stop comparing him to Jeff Teague.
                          And I took his bait. Sorry aamcguy. I enabled it.

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Re: George Hill's Role

                            Originally posted by aamcguy View Post
                            George Hill has been one of our brightest spots this year. Not only is he playing one of his lowest per-game minutes totals, but he has a career high usage rate while maintaining a very efficient shooting game. He has been a stellar defender since he has got his legs under him, and he has become a go-to player.

                            A lot of George's success has been attributed to Vogel (having no option but to) give the keys of the offense back to George. There is some truth to this I think. However, I don't think George receives as much blame for last season or as much credit for this season as he actually deserves. Hill freely gives up the ball; he's done so since he arrived here. He's a true team player. Where this hurt is is that Hill is probably our most efficient offensive player. He assists at the highest rate on our team, rarely turns it over, and shoots over 45% on a regular basis despite shooting a decent volume of three pointers. Where this season he demands that his mismatch be looked at, last season he was content to let the other wings get theirs. With no PG and no Lance this season, he demands the ball back when we need to make a play.

                            The "Stand in the Corner" myth????
                            I have been all on the "Vogel shouldn't have made Hill stand in the corner" bandwagon. But I've been paying attention to how George has scored this season. Hill is STILL regularly passing off to Solo, Watson, or Stuckey to initiate the offense. I don't think standing in the corner was really his problem. I think last season Hill wouldn't get the ball back by design--but he also didn't demand the ball back--when Lance or George would be running the play or calling their own number and get stopped. I think also that Hill has been given a few more plays to catch the ball on the move instead of being used to space the court and that's really helped. So credit to both Hill and Vogel this season.

                            But watch what happens this season when George REALLY gets it going. At that point, the opposing team often switches a bigger defender on to Hill. When that happens, Hill essentially starts playing as the de facto shooting guard because the wing can't keep up with George off the ball. He is still running the offense and dictating where the ball goes off the ball though, which is important.

                            So what are your thoughts? I think we've had enough talk about our negatives this year and I want to know why everybody thinks George has been so good this year.
                            We've all watched Hill play off the ball this season. The reason why I believe it still works, is because no one on this team can score. So naturally, the ball is fed back to Hill eventually and he's able to score.

                            However, I think it's another example of Vogel having his head firmly lodged up his ***. Hill's best games this season have always been when he's run the point and initiated the offense. This allows him to attack at the top of the key (where's he's best) when he wants and initiate offense. He's far superior to initiating offense than CJ Watson.

                            This past game is a prime example I believe of Vogels "head up the ***" syndrome. Hill still got his points, but the offense didn't run well when Hill was in the game. Other than Hill getting his, the offense was garbage- THis is reflected by Hill's -22 plus minus.

                            Hill is great on the ball. He can attack, and he's unselfish and wants to get others involved. He's by far our most superior PnR ball handler, and he constantly gets his teammates involved. You'll notice something this season when Hill dominates the ball- High assist numbers and an efficient offense from the Pacers. When he's off the ball he ends up with only 3 or 4 assists like tonight and the team suffers.

                            The only difference between this year and last year? PG and Lance aren't here to eat up shot attempts. This team needs GHill to initiate EVERY offensive set period. They play well that way.

                            When they don't? They suffer.

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Re: George Hill's Role

                              I think Vogel thinks "Hill can play PG AND SG, so when CJ Watson is in the game, I'll have him off the ball!! *lightbulb*. No. Let him run the point, and CJ will spot up. THe offense will flow.

                              FYI, even as i criticize Vogel, I know he continues to grow. He'll figure it out. I know he will. But it doesn't mean he's free from blame. He at times awful on offense.

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X